The deconstruction of identity is not the deconstruction of politics; rather, it establishes as political the very terms through which identity is articulated. This kind of critique brings into question the foundationalist frame in which feminism as an identity politics has been articulated. The internal paradox of this foundationalism is that it presumes, fixes, and constrains the very “subjects” that it hopes to represent and liberate [...] If identities were no longer fixed as the premise of political syllogism, and politics no longer understood as a set of practices derived from the alleged interests that belong to a set of ready-made subjects, a new configuration of politics would surely emerge from the ruins of the old. Cultural configurations of sex and gender might then proliferate or, rather, their present proliferation might then become articulable within the discourses that establish intelligible cultural life, confounding the very binarism of sex, and exposing its fundamental unnaturalness. 

-Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (New York: Routledge, 1999).

huh?

SEX SIGILS is an experimental rpg for one or more players, focused on themes of shared meaning and memory. In it, players will collaborate to tell a story by continually adding details to a sigil — a symbol which will, at the conclusion of the game, contain meaning legible only to those who were present for creation.

oh?

SEX SIGILS is a universal, setting-agnostic system — you know, like GURPS? Only it's actually not like that at all. Also, it was written for a game jam about transgender people fucking. 

So it is sort of also about fucking, but only in the same way that a swordfight can be about fucking, or eating mac n' cheese can be erotic, or laying on your living room floor writing a game description for an itch page only a few people will ever see when you're tired and you're stir crazy and you haven't left the apartment in two days can be religious.

hmm

it's about language, is what i mean. it's about the communicability of experience. and in order to communicate our experiences we have to abstract them, but we have to remember that the abstract isn't the article, or whatever korzybski said.

anyway

peace:)